Dikkaya Funda, Erdur Sevil Karaman
Department of Ophthalmology, Medipol University School of Medicine, Istanbul Medipol University, Bağcılar, 34124, Istanbul, Turkey.
Int Ophthalmol. 2019 Aug;39(8):1671-1678. doi: 10.1007/s10792-018-1026-8. Epub 2018 Sep 25.
The purpose of this study was to compare refraction measurements for children with the PlusOptix S09 and Spot Vision with cycloplegic retinoscopy.
One hundred thirty-six eyes of 68 children (26 boys and 42 girls) were evaluated prospectively. The subjects were separated into two groups. Group 1 comprised the subjects age between 5 and 9 years. Group 2 comprised the subjects age between 10 and 18 years. Photorefraction with PlusOptix S09, photorefraction with Spot Vision and cycloplegic retinoscopy were performed in each patient. Spherical equivalents, spherical power, cylindrical power and axis values were compared between three methods.
The mean age of the patients was 7.12 ± 1.5 years in group 1 and 12.24 ± 1.8 years in group 2. Spherical equivalent and spherical power measured with PlusOptix S09 were statistically smaller than measured with cycloplegic retinoscopy for group 1 (p = 0.001, p = 0.001) and for group 2 (p = 0.000, p = 0.000). The mean cylindrical power measured with PlusOptix S09 was not statistically different compared to cycloplegic retinoscopy for both groups (p = 0.314, p = 0.05). Spherical equivalents measured with Spot Vision were statistically smaller than measured with cycloplegic retinoscopy for both groups (p = 0.000, p = 0.012). Spherical power measured with Spot Vision was statistically smaller than measured with cycloplegic retinoscopy for group 1 (p = 0.000), but the difference was not statistically significant for group 2 (p = 0.084). The mean cylindrical power measured with Spot Vision was statistically higher than cycloplegic retinoscopy for both groups (p = 0.000, p = 0.012).
PlusOptix S09 and Spot Vision devices give acceptable results for screening, but prescription of spectacles should not be made according to PlusOptix S09 or Spot Vision devices alone.
本研究旨在比较PlusOptix S09和Spot Vision对儿童进行的验光测量结果与散瞳检影验光结果。
前瞻性评估68名儿童(26名男孩和42名女孩)的136只眼睛。受试者被分为两组。第1组包括年龄在5至9岁之间的受试者。第2组包括年龄在10至18岁之间的受试者。对每位患者进行PlusOptix S09电脑验光、Spot Vision电脑验光和散瞳检影验光。比较三种方法之间的等效球镜度、球镜度数、柱镜度数和轴位值。
第1组患者的平均年龄为7.12±1.5岁,第2组为12.24±1.8岁。对于第1组(p = 0.001,p = 0.001)和第2组(p = 0.000,p = 0.000),PlusOptix S09测量的等效球镜度和球镜度数在统计学上小于散瞳检影验光测量的结果。两组中PlusOptix S09测量的平均柱镜度数与散瞳检影验光相比在统计学上无差异(p = 0.314,p = 0.05)。两组中Spot Vision测量的等效球镜度在统计学上小于散瞳检影验光测量的结果(p = 0.000,p = 0.012)。第1组中Spot Vision测量的球镜度数在统计学上小于散瞳检影验光测量的结果(p = 0.000),但第2组差异无统计学意义(p = 0.084)。两组中Spot Vision测量的平均柱镜度数在统计学上高于散瞳检影验光(p = 0.000,p = 0.012)。
PlusOptix S09和Spot Vision设备在筛查中能给出可接受的结果,但不应仅根据PlusOptix S09或Spot Vision设备来开具眼镜处方。